State to Ban Phosphorus in Dishwasher Soap?

Every summer, lakes become inundated with algae. As the slimy, green muck dies, it chokes out oxygen, which can kill fish and other aquatic life. One cause of all that algae – phosphorus in the water. The phosphorus comes from natural sources such as decaying leaves, and it comes in farm and lawn fertilizer, which runs off into the water. But there’s also phosphorus in a product many of us use every day – dishwasher soap – which goes directly into the water and down the drain. One state might be the first in the nation to ban phosphorus in dishwasher soap, and as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports, other states might follow:

Transcript

Every summer, lakes become inundated with algae. As the slimy, green muck dies, it chokes out
oxygen, which can kill fish and other aquatic life. One cause of all that algae – phosphorus in the
water. The phosphorus comes from natural sources such as decaying leaves, and it comes in farm
and lawn fertilizer, which runs off into the water. But there’s also phosphorus in a product many
of us use every day – dishwasher soap – which goes directly into the water and down the drain.
One state might be the first in the nation to ban phosphorus in dishwasher soap, and as the Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports, other states might follow:


(ambient sound of lapping water)


Lakes are a source of natural beauty, recreation, tourist dollars, even food. And in Minnesota
people take their lakes seriously. But when the algae takes over, no one wants to swim in the
scum, fish die for a lack of oxygen and the lake’s ecosystem is endangered.


(natural sound break)


Phosphorus occurs naturally. Some of it comes from decaying vegetation, grass clippings and
dead leaves. But because too much phosphorus is harmful, lawmakers have banned it from
certain commercial products. Last year Minnesota banned it from lawn fertilizer. And decades
ago, many states outlawed laundry detergent containing phosphorus. But they didn’t ban it in
dishwasher soap.


“There were not near the number in 1970 of automatic dishwashers in the households. It’s an
everyday thing now. ”


Ray Cox Is a Republican representative in the Minnesota legislature. He is sponsoring the bill,
banning phosphorus in dishwasher soap. There are phosphorus free dishwasher soaps, but they’re
a tiny fraction of the market. Still, Cox says phosphorus free soaps work better than they used to
because of the improvements that have been made in dishwashers.


“There are many, many products around here available right now and they work great. We’ve
used it for many years at home and there’s no problem. I mean, our dishes are clean.”


(ambient sound of dishwasher running)


Unlike other products containing phosphorus, detergent is flushed directly down the drain. For
each box of dishwasher detergent, it costs your local sewer treatment plant at least two dollars
and fifty cents to remove the phosphorus. But most cities don’t have state of the art water
treatment, so a lot of phosphorus makes its way into lakes, rivers and streams. Just how much, no
one knows exactly. One study estimates that 6 percent of the phosphorus in water comes from
dishwasher detergent, according to Don Arnosti of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, a
coalition of 80 environmental groups.


“Removing this phosphorus will improve our waterways. How much, that’s what’s in debate. Is
it 6 percent as we suggest? Is it 8 percent? Is it 4 percent? And we say that’s not important.
Nobody is saying it’s not gonna be an improvement.”


But will the improvement be worth the cost? Tony Kwilas is a lobbyist for the Minnesota
Chamber of Commerce, which has taken the lead in attacking the ban. He says consumers won’t
stand for it because it doesn’t help that much and the replacement products are inferior.


“Why ban a product that we’re not quite sure the cost benefit of it. In Europe they went
phosphorus-free and they turned around and went back due to consumer complaints. Mainly it
sounds like there’s spotting and scratching on some of the glasses, and it doesn’t get all the food
off.”


Tony Kwilas says a ban on phosphorus in dishwasher detergent won’t really help much since
there are so many sources of phosphorus in the water.


“I’m not going to dispute that phosphorus is a problem, but if you look at what phosphorus is
contained in, it’s contained in antifreeze, it’s contained in chicken tenders, it’s contained in
bath beads, frozen fish, fire extinguishers, instant pudding, pet food, toothpaste, cake mixes. I
mean, so phosphorus is everywhere.”


To ban phosphorus in dishwasher soap would raise the cost about 70 cents a box. But most
consumers seem unaware of the issue, even those shopping at this food co-op in St Paul.


“I was not made aware that this was really harming our environment badly.” “I thought
phosphorus was already gone.” “You know, I just became aware of it, so I will start paying
attention to it right now.” “We don’t pay attention regularly.” “I had no idea that was in there
either.”


There doesn’t seem to be a consumer demand for phosphorus-free dishwasher detergent, just yet.
Don Arnosti of the Environmental Partnership says just as they did with dolphin-safe tuna and
phosphorus-free laundry soap, consumers need to make their voices heard.


“It’s time for the people of Minnesota to speak up and say clean water is more important than the
soap industry’s contribution to certain politicians.”


But if Minnesota passes the ban, what would happen? Would major detergent manufacturers
make special dishwasher soap just to sell in one state? Minnesota lawmaker Ray Cox says look
at what happened as states started to ban phosphorus in laundry detergent.


“As soon as the scale tipped to where we had about 20 states that were banning it all the
manufacturers gave up the fight and they reformulated and nobody makes anything that has that
significant content anymore. So while you can say a state by state basis doesn’t make any sense,
on many things I think that’s the way we have to go.”


Cox says if Minnesota starts the ball rolling, it’ll just be a matter of time before phosphorus is
removed from dishwasher soap everywhere, which is why both sides are paying so much
attention to what happens in Minnesota.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mary Stucky in St Paul.

Algae Mops Up Heavy Metals

The Great Lakes suffer from all kinds of pollution, but among the most dangerous pollutants from industrial waste are mercury, cadmium, and zinc. Researchers at Ohio State University are perfecting a way to clean up those heavy metals…. using algae. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Cohen explains:

Transcript

The Great Lakes suffer from all kinds of pollution, but among the most dangerous pollutants from industrial waste are mercury, cadmium, and zinc. Researchers at Ohio State University are perfecting a way to clean up those heavy metals – using algae. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Cohen explains:

Picture using algae as a sponge. The one-cell
plants attach themselves to the polluting metals…you pull them out of the
water…squeeze out the metals in an acid solution….and re-use the algae
sponge 30 times. Researcher Richard Sayre has genetically altered the
algae to sop up more pollution than ever:


“We’ve improved their ability to sequester and bind these heavy metals by a factor of five.”


Sayre stresses – the algae itself won’t be put
into the lakes free-floating …and it won’t even be living.


“The metal-binding capacity is about three times greater when they’re dead than when they’re alive.”


The next step for Sayre…convincing a few cities to let him put this algae into pollution control equipment so he can prove to them it’s a cheap and effective way to stop industrial waste before it gets into waterways.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill Cohen.

Proposed Pipeline Divides Community

A Findlay, Ohio-based oil company says it needs a new petroleum pipeline to help get gasoline and jet fuel products to market in the Great Lakes states. But Marathon-Ashland’s proposal has sparked opposition from environmentalists and some small business owners in Southeast Ohio who fear possible contamination of waterways and disruption of some pristine areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Borgerding has the story:

Transcript

A Findlay, Ohio based Oil Company says it needs a new petroleum pipeline to help get gasoline and jet fuel products to market in the Great Lakes states. But, Marathon-Ashland’s proposal has sparked opposition from environmentalists and some small business owners in Southeast Ohio who fear possible contamination of waterways and disruption of some pristine areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Borgerding reports.


The proposed 149-mile long pipeline will cross the Ohio River from Kenova, West Virginia and snake through parts of the Wayne National Forest and scenic Hocking Hills in Southeastern Ohio and South Central Ohio. Company spokesman Tim Aydt says the project will help stabilize gasoline prices in a region stretching from eastern Illinois to western New York.


“The existing pipeline infrastructure that serves us today is decades old and it was designed when there was only one grade of gasoline and one grade of diesel fuel. And it was designed to serve a population about half the size it is today. Over time, with the growth we’ve had in the Midwest we’ve outgrown that pipeline capacity and as a result we’ve witnessed the last two summers where we’ve had constrained supply that’s resulted in price spikes.”


The pipeline might help stabilize gasoline prices in the region by adding a second source of supply for refined petroleum products. Currently, The Great Lakes region is dependent solely on pipelines running out of refineries in the Gulf Coast states such as Louisiana and Texas. But, Marathon-Ashland’s proposal also presents a potential environmental risk. The pipeline will cross 363 streams, 55 wetlands, and parts of three watersheds. For some, the prospect of a pipeline carrying gasoline and jet fuel through environmentally sensitive areas has sparked fears. Jane Ann Ellis is a founder and trustee of Crane Hollow…. a privately owned, dedicated state nature preserve in the path of the pipeline.


“If this pipeline would be built and if there was any kind of leak this would decimate the clean water that we have. It is easier to keep your drinking water clean than it is to clean it up afterwards. And it’s cheaper in the long run for the general public.”


Michael Daniels also opposes Marathon-Ashland’s project. He owns a country inn that attracts tourists from Ohio and surrounding states. He says many of his customers come to the region to hear chirping birds, babbling brooks, and to see the fall foliage. Daniels says both construction and operation of the pipeline will have a negative effect on his business.


“Certainly! Who would want to come as a tourist and be exposed to that kind of noise and intrusion into their experience? So, there’s no question that it will impact my business.”


But company spokesman Tim Aydt says the pipeline route through parts of a national forest and other environmentally sensitive areas is the best possible route.


“We wanted to avoid population centers. We wanted to avoid residential or commercial developments and we wanted to avoid flood plains where we could. So, when all of that was put into the mix we came up with the best route overall. Obviously it’s not the cheapest route because it’s not a straight line between two points. But, about 80 percent of the route follows existing utility corridors or those areas that are less prone to development.”


Marathon-Ashland says without the pipeline the Great Lakes could soon face shortages of gasoline, lines at the pump and greater fluctuations in gas prices. The tension between the company and pipeline opponents turns on the question of whether Marathon-Ashland will be required to submit an “environmental impact statement.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is expected to make that decision early this year following a recommendation from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Corps spokesman Steve Wright says there’s no question such a requirement will delay the project.


“That will take longer. You know they take varying lengths of time but certainly they can’t be done very quickly.”


Marathon-Ashland contends an environmental impact statement (EIS) is unnecessary. But, opponents of the plan say the EIS is critical since the pipeline puts so many streams and wetlands at risk for potential pollution.


For the Great Lakes radio Consortium I’m Tom Borgerding

Battery-Powering Bacteria

U.S. scientists have identified bacteria that can eat pollution and generate electricity at the same time. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

A Road Salt Substitute?

  • Road salt spread on the streets of Ann Arbor, MI has a corrosive effect on this sewer grate. Many cities and states are looking for a less damaging, and more environmentally sensitive alternative to road salt.

With winter officially arriving, many towns and cities in the Midwest are preparing to fight the snow and ice that can make roads slippery and dangerous. That traditionally means spreading salt, but salt is damaging to the environment, so there is a growing movement toward using less corrosive and polluting means to make streets safe. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

With winter officially arriving, many towns and cities in the Great Lakes Region are preparing to fight the snow and ice that can make roads slippery and dangerous. That traditionally means spreading salt. But salt is damaging to the environment. So there is a growing movement toward using less corrosive and polluting means to make streets safe. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:


Rock salt and calcium chloride have been the workhorses of snow removal for many years. Together, they help lower the freezing temperature of snow and slush, making it easier for the snow to be plowed away or worn down by cars before it turns into ice. But along with the good has come a great deal of bad. Besides keeping our streets clear, both chemicals can also pollute nearby waterways. They release chlorides and heavy metals into the environment and their corrosiveness can damage roadways, causing cracking and even potholes. So governments have been trying to find alternatives that can help remove the snow, and do less damage. Among those alternatives are snow and ice melters made of corn by-products. Ari Adler is a spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Transportation. He says the department is in the second year of testing those alternatives:


“In Michigan, what we’re doing is we’re actually applying this material by itself, preferably before a snowstorm hits. So it sort of puts like a Teflon coating on and what it does is not allow the snow and ice to bond with the pavement. So its certainly easier to clear away just from people driving over it or if we send a plow, it’s going to clear up quicker than if we had to send a team of plows out after we get snow pack out there.”


Adler says the tests so far have been very encouraging, and his agency plans to increase the use of such products in the future. Manufacturers of corn and soybean based de-icers say there is a growing trend to look to these more natural products. Craig Phelps is with Natural Solutions, a company that makes a product called Ice Ban. It’s made from parts of a cornstalk that are not used for food. The result is a liquid that melts ice and snow even at very low temperatures. Phelps says the product can be used alone, or in combination with salt. He says when used in combination, the product reduces the amount of salt required to keep roads clear:


“The way to decrease the effective use of chlorides is to somehow increase their performance or increase their range of activity. Using a liquid in combination with a granular, dry salt can help. Most highway departments have found they use less salt, so that does decrease the amount of accumulated chlorides in the environment.”


Phelps says the biggest obstacle in getting cities and states to use corn based de icers is the added cost. But he says in addition to the environmental benefits, corn based de-icers will reduce wear and tear on streets, bridges, and cars because it does not have the corrosive effect of salt. Phelps says if those costs are taken into consideration, the corn based products are actually cheaper than salt. But not everyone believes that is true. Dave McKinney is the Operations Director for the City of Peoria, Illinois’ Public Works Department. He says using salt is not a major cause for street repairs in midwestern cities:


“The problem we are having with streets isn’t so much the salt as it is the wear and tear of the freeze-thaw. So yes, there are these benefits, but I don’t think it can offset the cost. Certainly not in my budget.”


McKinney says he has tested the corn-based products, and is satisfied that they work well. But he says Peoria will only use them if the price comes down. And there may be evidence that will happen. The market for corn and soybean based de-icing products has increased by a thousand percent over the past seven years, largely because producers are finding cheaper ways to make the products. And as demand continues to increase, manufacturers say the price will keep dropping. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

Reining in Diesel Exhaust

  • The EPA is planning to regulate smoke from diesel engines in farm and construction equipment. Photo courtesy of NESCAUM.

You see them every time you pass a construction site: big machines belching thick diesel smoke. The smoke isn’t just annoying. It causes major health and environmental problems. Now, after years of dealing with other issues, the EPA is taking on this major source of uncontrolled pollution: emissions from farm and construction equipment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Halpert looks at the challenges the EPA faces in this far-reaching regulatory effort:

Transcript

You see them every time you pass a construction site. Big machines belching thick diesel smoke. The smoke isn’t just annoying. It causes major health and environmental problems. Now, after years of dealing with other issues, the EPA is taking on this major source of uncontrolled pollution: emissions from farm and construction equipment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Halpert looks at the challenges EPA faces in this far-reaching regulatory effort.


Emissions from diesel engines create problems for both the environment and people’s health. Diesels release nitrogen oxides, which are a factor in acid rain and smog. They also spew very fine particulates that can lodge deep in the lung when inhaled. And that causes respiratory problems.


Controlling these emissions is no easy task. That’s because most diesel engines still burn fuel containing high amounts of sulfur. The sulfur clogs up existing pollution control devices. And that makes it a lot tougher to come up with ways to reduce emissions. But Christopher Grundler, deputy director of the EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality in Ann Arbor, Michigan, says its an important challenge.


“In the year 2007 we estimate that off road or non-road emissions will make up over 40% of the air pollution from mobile sources or transportation sources, so it’s a big deal.”


In tackling air pollution, EPA’s first job was to clean up gasoline car emissions. Now its moving onto diesels. The agency’s first challenge came when they issued a rule for highway trucks last year. That plan drops sulfur content in diesel fuel from 500 parts per million to 15 parts per million. It also reduces overall diesel emissions by 90% by the year 2007. The EPA now wants to use this rule as a model for farm and construction equipment as well. But the agency is likely to face opposition from refiners, who are fighting the on road rule. Jim Williams is with the American Petroleum Institute.


“We feel that the ability of the refining industry to make sufficient volumes of 15 ppm in the timeframe that EPA wants us to is highly questionable, whether we can do that. We’ve done some studies that show there will be supply shortfalls with the 15-ppm limit.”


Williams is pushing to phase in the requirement over a longer period. He says that would give refiners more time to produce the necessary quantities of low sulfur fuel. Until then, refiners also want to continue providing high sulfur fuel.


But Engine Manufacturers don’t like that idea. They’ve agreed to support tough standards only if the switchover to low sulfur fuel happens quickly. Jed Mandel runs the Engine Manufacturers Association. He’s worried that if cheaper, low sulfur fuel remains abundant; users could continue relying on the dirtier fuel.


“If there are dual fuels available — if there’s cleaner fuel on the marketplace for some time, as well as higher sulfur dirtier fuel, and there’s a price differential in that fuel, there will be a disincentive for users to buy the cleanest engines.”


Mandel says that could cause a delay in purchasing these engines for several years.


Like Mandel, Jason Grumet, executive director of the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, also wants tight standards. Northeast states, plagued with acid rain and smog caused largely by these diesels, are pushing the EPA to develop the tightest standards possible to meet clean air goals and also to better protect equipment operators.


“The particles from diesel emissions can lodge very deep within the human lung and we know that these particles are carcinogens, so for folks who work with construction equipment every day or on construction sites, for people who farm or plow fields for several hours a day, we think that the emissions of diesel pollutants cause a very substantial and real threat to their health.”


(sound of tractor)


Herb Smith isn’t worried about his health. Smith hops off his tractor and stands on the land that his family has farmed in Ida Township, Michigan since 1865. Despite years of inhaling diesel fumes, Smith said he’s in perfect physical condition. Though he supports regulations to control diesel emissions, he’s worried that the EPA will place undue hardship on farmers.


“I am concerned about fuel costs because our margin in farming is very slim and anything we add to fuel costs, we have to absorb it.”


Smith fears that some of the smaller farmers may not be able to bear higher fuel and engine costs and could go out of business.


Despite the many different viewpoints on the issue, EPA’s Grundler is confident that his agency can develop a rule that will bring tremendous public health benefits at a reasonable cost.


“We’ve shown we can do it for cars and SUVs. We’ve shown it can be done for heavy duty on highway engines. I’m absolutely certain it can be done for these sorts of engines as well.”


The agency expects to issue a technical report outlining emission control options by the end of the year. A proposal is due by the middle of next year. For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Halpert.

Monitoring System on Hand for Bioterrorism

Scientists who monitor pollutants in rain and snow in the U.S. are offering their monitoring network to be used in the event of a wide scale bioterrorist attack. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein has more:

Transcript

Scientists who monitor pollutants in rain and snow in the U.S. and Great Lakes are offering their monitoring network to be used in the event of a wide scale bioterrorist attack. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein has more.


The National Atmospheric Deposition Program is best known for its early detection of acid rain in the 1970s. It has a network of over 200 sites that measure chemicals like sulfur dioxides and mercury in precipitation. But coordinator Van Bowersox says the network could also be used in the case of an environmental emergency to trace things like anthrax spore.


“To help track perhaps the source of the material or perhaps just how wide dispersed the material may be. So this would be, for example, for a widespread release of a bioterrorism agent over a broad area.”


Bowersox says the samples of such agents would be sent to a special laboratory for analysis.


The idea wouldn’t be an unprecedented use for the network. The NADP surveyed the nation’s atmosphere for nucleotides following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. It also measured the amount of particles in the air after the eruption of Mount St. Helens.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.

Meatpacker Pays for Pollution

The largest meatpacker in the world has agreed to pay millions of dollars in penalties because of pollution at its plants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The largest meatpacker in the world has agreed to pay millions of dollars in penalties because of pollution at its plants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.


Iowa Beef Packers, known as IBP Incorporated, has agreed to pay more than four million dollars in penalties and make ten million dollars in pollution prevention improvements at several of its plants. That agreement settles a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Among a number of violations at several plants, the EPA had charged that IBP was releasing large quantities of ammonia into the Missouri River and one of its plants emitted 19 times the maximum amount of the pollutant, hydrogen sulfide, from its smokestacks. Besides paying the penalties, IBP will upgrade its wastewater treatment facilities and install required air pollution control equipment. In a release, IBP states that it doesn’t “agree with the nature and extend to the claims made in the federal government’s lawsuit.” but it’s glad to put the matter behind it. IBP was recently acquired by Tyson Foods. Government officials say with the settlement, they hope IBP will now be a better neighbor. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.